Andre Miller Is Honest
by Ben Golliver on Sep 1, 2009 4:08 PM PDT
in News
Email
PrintNice scoop here from Brian T. Smith of the Columbian, as he quotes Andre Miller with some raised eyebrows about the whole starting point guard situation.
"I mean, I'm going in there as the starting point guard - there's nothing else to it. Steve Blake is a great player ... he's done a good job. And I look at it as a challenge. Nothing is handed to you. So I have to go in there with the right attitude, knowing that, this is a point guard spot that is going to have to be battled for. I think I've earned the right in this league as a point guard to be a starter. I just have to go and prove it again.
If they were sitting here and saying ... you're bringing in a Jason Kidd or a Steve Nash or a Baron Davis, would they be saying the same thing? Probably not."
Hit the link above for the full quote.
Miller sounds motivated, focused and, most importantly, realistic in his self-assessment. Three thumbs up.
Steve Blake couldn't be reached for comment. He was too busy swinging the ball around the perimeter.
-- Ben (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com)
156 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like it
I want my guys thinking they should be starting, but need to earn the right to do so.
The only guys who have cemented their long term starting positions are Roy and Aldridge.
by Bskey on Sep 1, 2009 4:16 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
It's going to be a battle
I would rather have this “problem” then an alternative of no good PGs.
Brandon Roy, 'nuff said.
I'm happy about what he is saying.
But, Miller, we would be just as unsure if the guy was starter material if it was Kidd, Nash, and ughhh.. Davis.
We know your a higher echelon PG, but you listed two severely degenerating PGs and one person who most of us would be upset to have on our team.
I voted Bayless. If he kills (against Blake & Miller playing at their level) that is awesome news.
Final word: Why don’t you take the interview while you work on your three point shot? Then you might be sure to overtake Blake.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Andre hasn't missed a shot or a pass yet and he's already getting ripped.
It is the Way of the Bedge.
Andre has missed more shots than probably any Blazer currently on the team.
How is it a rip to say he isn’t that great from three? Is it a rip to say that Przy has few to no post moves?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Yes. It is.
If I were to (heaven forbid) rip on Joel Przybilla, I would definitely start by mentioning his post-move deficiency.
"It all depends on where his growth will come and we think his growth will come within us" -- Kevin Pritchard on Jerryd Bayless
He's a 10 year vet.
Asking him to work on his 3 point shot in the twilight of his career is utterly ridiculous.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
I respectfully disagree.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
by staylost on Sep 1, 2009 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
He'll take some 3 point shots
It would be nice if he made a good percentage of them.
Kidd’s percentage improved the last couple of years, I believe.
It is something that can be improved with practice, even at 33.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
It has improved
but the difference is that he has always shown capacity to hit the 3 pointer. 37% in 97, 36.6% in 98. His career bests have come in 08 and 09 (38.1% and 40.6%, respectively), yes, however its not like he could just magically start making them all of a sudden.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
Are people suppose to stop learning in their 30's?
I hope not, because I’m depressed enough about being 31……knowing I’m done improving would be a major blow.
Witty Unpredictable Talent and Natural Game
Michael Jordan...
Practically reinvented himself as a player at that age by working on his outside game
I also respectfully disagree.
As a player enters the endgame of his pro career, if he’s in it to squeeze out as much floor time as he can, then he’s obligated to enhance skills that don’t rely as much on sheer athleticism. 3pt accuracy is one of those skills that he can build on to compensate for other losses.
Furthermore, we’re one of the few teams in the league to have a dedicated, full-time shooting coach.
Clearly the coaching staff is not going to look for Andre to shoot the three, and consequently I don’t expect or depend on him to work on his three ball. But it would be completely natural and reasonable for him to take that initiative, especially if he is serious about being the dominant PG and integrating himself as much as possible into the existing playbook.
I know Blake is a good fit.
And I know Miller’s no longer a spring chick. But I really don’t see how it’s not Miller spot to lose, despite what coach says. But McMillan said exactly the right things. You don’t throw Blake under the bus because there’s a new guy in town. By the time training camp comes, everyone will be on the same page as who should start and who should come off of the bench. Blake, Miller and McMillan included.
μὴ φοβοῦ, μόνον πίστευε.
by T Darkstar on Sep 1, 2009 4:38 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
That's how I see it too
You tell the starters from last year that “the job is theirs to lose” and you tell everyone else that they have to win the starting job in practice. And I should add that I don’t mind guys knowing their role, but I don’t want someone on the roster who is capable of being the starter and say they want to come off the bench.
I agree whole-heartedly
Let’s face, Paul Allen is paying Andre Miller $7million a year to be the backup. Anybody who thinks Blake is starting this year is naive, at best.
Cash has, hopefully, got nothing to do with it.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Allen paid Raef a whole lot more $
and LaFrentz never started a game
Travis made more $ than Batum last year, as well
regardless of who starts, Miller will play 30+ mpg at PG, Blake will play the rest, except for garbage time minutes when Bayless will get his shot
and the Blazers will get their best PG play since the days of Rod Strickland and Greg Anthony
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
I Think.
When it comes to the starting point guard i think it will have a lot more to do with the players that will be starting around them. Both point guards have nearly the same amount of strengths and weaknesses however they are arranged differently for each player. Blake an excellent swing three point shooter while Miller possesses a much better dive and pick and role game. Miller can create for other people while in a lot of cases Blake needs Roy to develop plays which is not a bad thing.
Looking at our centers I think Miller would be a much better fit with GO. A pick and role point guard could give GO many uncontested and easy buckets. Also Miller has a tenancy to get his ankles broke on defense and GO can back him up in the lane. (LMA also fits in this situation)
Miller could be a bad starter next to Roy and as both have stated they need the ball in their hands to be successful.
We all know what Blake can do…..
by dew0lfe on Sep 1, 2009 4:40 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
The "needs the ball in their hands" theory is always taken as so literal.
Every guy needs the ball in their hands to score.
This idea that Brandon cannot play off the ball just because he’s a master of the iso just seems incorrect to me. He played terrific off of the ball in the all-star games, I know, those are all-star games, but still.
He can score by getting set up, and so can Miller. Roy has become a respectable enough shooter to spread the floor at times. I’ve seen Miller receive the ball at around the foul line and hit the jumper multiple times when AI2 was playing primary ballhandler.
Miller’s exceptional fast break and lobbing/entry passing skills are going to get Roy a lot more easy baskets than he’s used to, and that is far from a bad thing. you don’t NEED a 40% 3pt shooter in your starting line up when you have PG who can get the rest of your team easy baskets.
I’m not trying to single you out dew0lfe I understand what you’re saying, I just think sometimes the square peg in round hole concept gets overblown even by the players themselves.
Thats why it was a minor point.
All I know is i want to see
Miller
LMA
GO
"And our second unit can probably start in most NBA cities." -Maurice Lucas
Good point
I have been trying to say what you said, just don’t know how to say it. I don’t know how Miller will work out with different groups; if he is what everybody says he is and I have no reason to doubt it. then he can help almost everybody on the team, but can only play with four at a time.
It was said that Joel was great on a pick and roll with Van Excel (sp). Therefore he might also be good with making Joel a offensive threat.
Who do you want Andre to be with? I like BRoy saying he would be running the wing when Andre was running. Does that give you goosebumps or what?
magnumpi
by BBK on Sep 1, 2009 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
I just think that we wont have to worry about BRoy when it comes to a PG matching with him. But it is very different for the other younger players that could use the perfect point guard to maximize their output.
"And our second unit can probably start in most NBA cities." -Maurice Lucas
Fit theory
There is a lot of discussion in the blog and elsewhere about this guy or that guy fitting better with this group or that. IMO this is overrated. If I am the coach I want the best five players I can find at their position, I want them starting and I want them taking the bulk of the minutes. I once asked a high school football coach why he played so many of his players both ways (on offense and defense) and he answered simply “best 11”. The same thing applies in the NBA. You want Brandon on the floor regardless of who the other four are. If Miller is your best point guard (pretty clear) then you want him on the floor at the beginning of the game, the end of the game and most of the time in the middle.
The total is not always equal to the sum of the parts
Football is a different beast than basketball. There’s a reason players like Ben Gordon, Jason Terry and our own Travis Outlaw aren’t starters on their teams. Players should be put into situations where they are best utilizing their skills for the team, not where they cancel each other out.
The starting spot will get sorted out in preseason.
Brandon will decide who he wants to start with, and then he and Nate will work it out. I wouldn’t bet my money against Blake, especially if Joel starts.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 1, 2009 5:24 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
You're naive if you think they'll run the same type of offense for Miller as they do with Blake.
C’mon man, use some smarts.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
Forgive me, I'm stupid.
So when Roy drives with the Ball, what will Miller be doing?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Watching Roy score 2 points?
Roy is equally effective off the ball, and can shoot the J. Miller is around so Roy doesn’t have to drive 78% of the time.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
I agree that it is great to get Miller in to take the brunt of the attack out of Roy's hands.
And I think Roy will play nice off of Miller (look how awesome he was playing off the ball in the ASG).
But it is sad that Andre’s man will be doubling Roy as Roy tries to get to the basket.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Andre is an excellent mid-range shooter
I doubt his man will be leaving him wide open too often.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
exactly.
You can’t leave your man just because he doesn’t shoot 3s. It’s not that simple. Miller is a scoring threat, more so than Blake ever was. He won’t spread the floor the same but that doesn’t mean there are not plenty more ways to score with Miller in than Blake.
Miller will make himself available, on the weak side
if Andre’s man leaves him to double Roy on a drive or post up, then Brandon will pass it Miller who will then have a seam to drive the ball to the hoop. He’ll either score, get fouled, or pass it to a big man who will have a high-percentage shot
next question?
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
How does it feel to be 39?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
It's been too long, since then
I definitely was more flexible, especially in the neck area
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Well, I'm out of questions.
You got all the answers correct. Sorry. I don’t have any prizes.
I’m sorry about your neck. Did you have surgery?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
nah, just advancing age
the chiropractor is in your future, too
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
What does Parker do when Manu drives the ball?
No way it will work. Pop is a fool if he thinks he can run a team with PG who can’t shoot threes. What a dummy.
by Nick Van Excellent on Sep 1, 2009 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
It is a choice not an ultimatum
I can think of Miller, BRoy, Batuum LMA and Greg starting and also starting in the All-star game.
Being on the second team is a choice of players not a ultimatum of not being good enough.
We have had this discussion before. Which poison do you want to feed the opponents?
hg
I am glad Miller wants the job...
…and would expect nothing less of him.
Ben you are an excellent blogger and I enjoy reading your stuff. I have to tell you though… every time you take a cheap shot at Blake it makes you look less than you are.
I know…deaf ears and you’ll never let go of your hate… but I had to say it…
by Ilikeemall on Sep 1, 2009 5:41 PM PDT reply actions 8 recs
A funny cheap shot is only good if it contains a smidgen of truth. This one does.
Blake isn’t exactly known for his threatening drives and passes inside. He can do it, but there is no doubt Miller is the more aggressive player in that regard.
There's Gotta Be More To Life
It's not that. It is that it is always directed at Blake.
If Ben generally cheapshoted everyone, then it would be different.
He may be right about Blake. But that smidgen of truth looks like animosity after a year and a half.
Either way, even if you count this fault, we are lucky to have Ben here.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Not always
but Sergio is gone now.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Travisis still here, however.
"Aneurysm".
When Outlaw wins a game on a last-second shot, it’s called an "annthefaneurysm". QualityPie
Yeah, but Miller isn't known for his outside shooting. So why cheap shot Blake and not Miller
for his presumptuous " I mean, I’m going in there as the starting point guard — there’s nothing else to it", after Nate already declared that Steve was his starter (for now). I have no problem with Miller wanting the job, or believing that he can earn it, but why say it like that? Why not just keep quiet and go earn it, if you can?
Miller has never stuck with any team he has been on – Cleveland let him walk, Clippers let him walk, Denver traded him, and Philly let him walk. He was our 3rd or apparently lower FA choice. He has never won a playoff series (0-5). How exactly has he already earned this starting spot?
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 1, 2009 5:58 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Keep going on that quote...
He is going to battle for the position. He feels he is going to win it. He is going to go and prove it. Why is that presumptuous? If he was talking like he didn’t have to step up and prove himself, that would be presumptuous.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
You are proving the analogy works though.
There is nothing wrong with swinging the ball around the perimeter, just like there was nothing wrong with what Miller said (other than Baron Davis would be guaranteed the starting position!?!). Both are silly things to pick on.
Why is Blake slighted?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Davis, Nash and Kidd all have a reputation. No team would bring them in with the intention to make them the backup. He is referring to that he has almost the same experience as a starter but people still doubt him.
There's Gotta Be More To Life
He isn't close to the reputation of Nash (twice MVP) or Kidd (9-time All-Star).
It’s ludicrous to put himself in their company. Even Davis is a 2-time All-Star.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 1, 2009 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions
No, it was presumptuous to say he was "going in there as the starting point guard — there’s nothing else to it".
He should have just said he was going in to compete and try to earn the spot.
His statements are mix of I already have it (“there’s nothing else to it”), I deserve it (“I think I’ve earned the right in this league as a point guard to be a starter”), and I will compete and prove it. The ‘I already have it’, and ‘I deserve it’ parts, are unnecessary and don’t show good leadership.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 1, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions
He does deserve it. He is going to be the starting PG.
It sounds to me like he’s just being a rational, intelligent person. I would be pissed if I was in Miller’s position and heard people suggesting Blake should start over me. That would be like people suggesting Rudy should start over Roy. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, but Blake is coming off a “career” season that didn’t touch what Miller did last year.
I think Miller is just stating the obvious.
by Nick Van Excellent on Sep 1, 2009 10:47 PM PDT up reply actions
It was Nate that said Blake was still the starter.
But it’s so obvious, I guess Nate’s opinion doesn’t count.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 2, 2009 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions
Nate says a lot of things preseason.
He once said Roy was going to come off the bench his rookie season because he didn’t like the way the second unit looked if Roy started.
It’s just Nate being Nate.
by Nick Van Excellent on Sep 2, 2009 5:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I think most of us know that Nate was "saying the right thing" and giving respect
to the guy that helped get him 54 wins last year. My point was that Miller should have been less brash and also just “say the right thing”. I suppose I need to remember that many young kids (and all our players are young kids to me) speak with more bravado today and that seems to be more acceptable than I was taught growing up.
Regardless, as Nate says, “the players will determine who plays” (by how they play, who’s injured, etc.). Who guessed at this time last year that Nic would start all year, and Oden would be coming off the bench at the end of the year?
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 2, 2009 3:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Did you read the rest of Andre's quote?
I’m not sure why Ben left it out, perhaps to make Miller’s comments appear to be "more controversial’?
It’s just about which players play well with each other, and how the coaches plan to use them. I can’t control the coaches’ decision, as far as who’s on the court and the amount of time and all that. I just have to just do what I’m told, basically.
Sorry, but that didn’t sound like a guy who’s saying “the wrong things” to me
RT: Who guessed at this time last year that Nic would start all year, and Oden would be coming off the bench at the end of the year?
Batum took everyone by surprise, that won’t happen again. And I remember there were “snickers” when Joel said he wasn’t conceeding his starting job to Oden, heading into camp last fall. Przy is like a rock (or a tree stump) that no amount of horsepower can dislodge. I’m glad we’ve got him on our side
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Well...
Oden would have started last season if it wasn’t for injuries. In fact Webster probably would have started over Batum if he hadn’t been injured as well.
So I guess Blake’s best chance is if something horrible happens to Miller’s body.
by Nick Van Excellent on Sep 2, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Greg never won "his" job back
after running into Maggette’s knee
I think maintaining “continuity” in the starting lineup was a factor for Nate, heading down the stretch. And Oden was probably less-likely to get into quick foul trouble, coming off the bench.
But Joel isn’t chopped liver, either. Especially on the defensive boards
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Nate's not lying.
Technically, Blake is the last guy to start at PG so no one can displace him until the first game of the season.
No it absolutely wouldn't...
…be anything like saying Rudy should start over Roy… and I think you know that.
Webster should start over Batum
He’s paid more and has more experience.
by tominhawaii on Sep 2, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Give me a break
the way people talk about Blake, I get the feeling that even if we brought in Devin Harris, people would want to make him “earn” the spot because Blake “worked so well with Brandon last year”. Miller is simply an exponentially better player than Blake. There’s a reason he started over him in Denver. It’s not like Blake has gotten much better while Andre’s gotten worse.
Miller’s been in the top 10 in the league for total assists ever since his second year in the league. When Blake does that a single solitary time, we can talk.
by Royster on Sep 1, 2009 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Blake and Miller never played together in Denver.
Or so I hear.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Blake and Miller were never on the same team together in Denver.
Blake’s shooting has gotten better since Denver, and he shot 43% on 3’s last year (vs Miller’s astonishing 21% career mark). If you don’t see how that helps Roy’s game, we don’t need to talk.
But if want to talk about assists Blake averaged 5.9 per 36 minutes playing with Roy the last two years while Miller averaged 6.6 per 36 minutes. Blake had 3.5 assists per turnover for the last two years while Miller had only 2.7 assists per turnover. Should I be blown away by Miller’s assist performance?
The fact is that these are two very different types of players. Miller should add a new look to our offense, help our big guys to score in the post, help Rudy and Webster get better looks, and maybe help the team run more (but I’m not holding my breath on that one). He’s a huge upgrade over Sergio and hopefully an upgrade over Blake (in total). So I’m glad we have him.
But none of that has anything to do with Miller claiming he’s going into camp as the starting point guard when Nate already said otherwise. It isn’t about how good Miller is, it’s about saying the right things when you join a team that won 54 games last year. A 10-year veteran ought to know better and let his play do his talking.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 2, 2009 1:30 AM PDT up reply actions
You act like he demanded the starting spot.
He’s confident that it will be his because he’s ready to earn it. Nothing wrong with that. He says it’s going to be a battle.
He’s well aware that he has to show up in more ways than one if he wants to be the starter.
Nate would say Blake is the starter if we brought in Chris Paul until training camp starts, that’s just how he is.
I woudl rec you for the Blake/Miller comparison
but I’m not in the least bothered by Miller’s comments.
He’s got the confidence needed to be successful. He isn’t going to cause trouble if he didn’t start. He was told it was possible he wouldn’t. He thinks he can overcome Blake’s advantages and get the job. Good for him.
He is better than Blake, but you are right that “exponentially” is an overstatement.
It’s all about fit.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
My bad on the Denver timeline
had my trade dates messed up. But I stand by my statement that Miller is simply a much, much better player than Blake. You don’t sign a guy for $7 million a year and then expect him to come off the bench.
Shockingly enough to Blazer fans, A/TO isn’t the be all/end all of PG stats, or else Calderon would be considered the best PG in the league. The only two years that Blake’s even been in the same strata as Miller assist-wise has been when he’s been on a superior team talent-wise (unless you’re super high on Thad Young).
It has nothing to do with his play doing the talking. Given that he’s played in the league long enough and his accomplishments, he deserves enough respect to be considered the starter, and even here, he’s just confidently stating that that’s what’s going to happen at the end of the day.
RT: A/TO isn’t the be all/end all of PG stats
A/TO means a lot to Nate, and Miller’s ratio is pretty good for a PG who takes many more chances with the ball than Blake
no risk = lower reward
Steve’s “dribble halfway in, then back-pedal it out” style of “penetration” drives me nuts, but he’ll be an above-average backup PG on a contending team.
Even if he starts
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
If Miller was exponentially better than Blake, then Miller would be an all star
Miller is better than Blake but I’d say they’re in the same tier of point guards.
I really can't agree with that.
There are definitely 1-2 tiers between Blake and all-star.
Miller can do so much more than Blake, but doesn’t have that 3 point shot. I still give the edge to Miller big time.
Miller studies hours and hours of video on his own time to know his opponents and attack their weak spots.
I love Blake, but Miller is certainly above him as far as tiers go. I am glad we have both though.
Arguing about arbitrary tier levels is ridiculous.
There could be at least sixty something practical tiers of point guards in the NBA.
Theoretically there could be thousands-plus tiers.
Or there could be only two.
Since it is just something arbitrary we come up with in our minds, it is unlikely some other person’s arbitrary division will be the same as ours.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
It's not really about the tiers themselves.
I’m just saying Andre is definitely a level above Blake even if he isn’t an all-star.
But what if I say there are only two tiers.
Tier 1: PGs who could start.
Tier 2: PGs who could never start.
Pretty dumb tier system I made up, but I hope it shows that without explaining why you’ve got your tiers the way you do, they are sort of silly to argue about.
I agree that if we add up & compare how good Blake and Miller are, Miller comes up as somewhere above Blake. But there are things that Blake does better than Miller. In the end that means in some situations I’d take Blake, in others Miller. It really all depends on the type of offense we are trying to run. I, like nearly everyone else, chose Miller with Oden or Joel for the working it inside factor.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
I have no idea why you're going on about tiers.
My post was not about tiers, it was just about Andre being better.
Tom was the one who brought up tiers, I simply continued along that line of thinking and disagreed that Andre and Blake would be on the same one.
Most people have a good idea how the amount of tiers there should be, not 2, or 1000.
I think most people have the same basic idea about teirs.
It’s just a general way of talking about players. I’m sure there are plenty of disagreements about who belongs where (Blake is not in the same tier with Miller IMHO) but in general I think everyone understands the concept.
by Nick Van Excellent on Sep 2, 2009 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I had the exact same thought
but decided that joke was too dumb for even me to post.
Therefore, I appreciate you doing it so I don’t have to look dumb for doing so.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
He will also be 34 this season.
It’s going to be a battle, and Blake’s to lose. Terrible problem to have.
It won't be a problem
if everyone stays healthy and we’re winning. Blake’s a classy guy and one way or another he’ll make it work.
Nor is Miller known for his 3 point shot...
the written,“funny cheap shot with the smidgeon of truth” is only the obvious cheap shot. The more subtle shot is that Ben thinks this mild and unremarkable statement is news worthy…
I know Miller is a better PG than Steve but I appreciate Blakes contribution to this team and his history means something to me. I don’t understand the upside of posters being negative to guys like Steve or Travis and really don’t get an editor doing it.
But… I already know… I’m too soft… and apparently too loyal to imperfect “good guys”.
by Ilikeemall on Sep 1, 2009 5:56 PM PDT reply actions 6 recs
Great, Great, Great.
I have low BBIQ, I guess. but I agree with you on the negativity towards players that are not as good as they would like.
In this case it is a matter of who plays with who IMO.
hg
by BBK on Sep 1, 2009 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks for the support BBK...
I think I recognize you as one of the few voices of reason from O-live…I don’t spend much time over there anymore but your hg initials look familiar…
GO BLAZERS!!!
Yes I rant on O-live
I rant about kicking players while they are down. I rant about all the Low BBIQ posters talk about. Mostly just slamming players because like you I just don’t understand all the negativity.
I was born with a hearing defect and because of that I have a speech impediment. You don’t realize how cruel people can get over something like that. I used to beat or try to beat the hell out of everybody that mocked me or made fun of me until a policeman told me I had best learn to live with my handicap or I would spend lots of time behind bars. I think that is why I get all worked up about the cruel tongues that can cut a man’s heart out.
Oops getting carried away. look at the bright side. I discovered blogs and I am pretty good on the key board and no one knows about my speech impediment.
by BBK on Sep 1, 2009 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I skip O-live entirely
You should, too. The presence of sane commenters gives validity to the other kind. Just avoid it. It will lower your blood pressure, too.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
That's funny...
in a cruel and insensitive sort of way.
The cowards never started
The weak died along the way
Only the strong survived
They were the Trailblazers
Hmm
shot is that Ben thinks this mild and unremarkable statement is news worthy…
Why is Miller not a “good guy” when he insinuates he wants to start ?
Why is Ben taking a cheap shot , when he reports on the brewing battle for starting PG which will DEFINITLY have an effect on our season and on the team?
No one is contending that Blake’s contribution to the team is less worthy. it’s just that Miller is going to start, and Blake is not (according to Miller).
TP
The Princess of Blazersedge
Sports do not build character. They reveal it. - Casey Dillon Stengel
I have nothing against what Miller said...
This statement, “Steve Blake couldn’t be reached for comment. He was too busy swinging the ball around the perimeter.” at the end and the subtle editing of the original article to eliminate a much softer first line are what make this a cheap shot.
I know Ben to be an excellent internet journalist. This kind of “stir it up”, take shots at others, writing should be left to others… IMO.
Jerryd Bayless also could not be reached for comment.
He was too busy keeping the bench seats warm.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
If Andre Miller is a starter, then Greg Oden should also be a starter.
My main thing is that Oden and Miller should play together, while Joel Przybilla and Steve Blake should play together. Now, if Miller is a starter, this is how the minutes should be allotted between him and Steve Blake.
FIRST QUARTER & THIRD QUARTER
Six Minutes
C: Greg Oden
PG: Andre Miller
Six Minutes
C: Joel Przybilla
PG: Steve Blake
SECOND QUARTER & FOURTH QUARTER
Four Minutes
C: Joel Przybilla
PG: Steve Blake
Eight Minutes
C: Greg Oden
PG: Andre Miller
That’s 28 minutes per game for Oden and Miller, while Przybilla and Blake receive 20 minutes per game.
Anyway, there’s only one thing that’s for certain about the point guard ordeal: Jerryd Bayless will ride the pine.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
by AK1984 on Sep 1, 2009 6:25 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I agree that Miller+Oden and Blake+Joel makes the most sense.
But it would also be good to have Miller with Rudy. Miller can post up, drive, and dish to Rudy, and also lob pass to Rudy, none of which Blake does effectively. Rudy provides the 3-pt threat when Miller is in the game, whereas Blake needs to play with a guard that drives (like Roy) to get his 3-pt shots.
I am also concerned that Roy will get double teamed more effectively with Miller in the game, and Roy is not as good as a catch and shoot player (but that could change). Miller should get more minutes than Blake, but if so, he and Roy must be able to play together as well as Blake and Roy.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 1, 2009 7:03 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not so sure
If Oden and Miller play together, and Steve and Joel play together, you run the risk of the Steve-Joel unit being pretty one dimensional offensively. If Steve and Joel are playing with Brandon, then Brandon is going to take the bulk of the burden of creating offensively. If they aren’t playing with Brandon, I don’t know who will create.
Joel is pretty limited offensively. Put Andre with Joel and he will create opportunities for Joel that Steve wouldn’t, and make the offense function.
I think Greg needs some real time with Andre to help his development, but Steve’s deep threat combined with Greg’s low post threat is going to create a lot of room for Brandon to operate. I’d like to see Steve and Greg start, and Andre and Greg finish the close games.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Dre makes other players better
I don’t know how to describe it in detail. After watching him play for many years, he can just flat out play the point. He’s a starter and whoever starts at center will make no difference. If he drives and Pryz is open under the basket he’ll get it to him. If GO has an advantage in the post, he’ll get it to him. If someone is open at the 3 point line, he’ll get it to them. If the play breaks down, he’ll put his head down and go to the hole and get fouled. This guy is a real deal point, without many weaknesses. Best thing, the Blazers stole him.
I'm hoping Miller (and coaching) can make Greg proficient at running the pick and roll.
It’s not just the additional points that we can score, but also the fouls that Greg can force on the opposing big guys if he can attack the hoop on the P&R. I think Miller can also get better looks for Rudy than Sergio did, because he can post up or drive and still dish out to Rudy.
I’m not worried about our offense stagnating with Joel and Blake. We did all right with them for 21 games last year while Oden was out (and of course without Andre). Even when Oden came back we still started Blake and Joel. Plus we add Webster and subtract Frye, which should provide more offense this year.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 1, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions
We didn't stagnate with Joel and Blake
because Brandon was also in the game.
But if you put those guys in a second unit, I fear it is another story.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
But even if Roy is out
you probably have Rudy, LMA, and either Webster or Batum with Joel and Blake. Nate’s philosophy last year (and I would hope this year) was to always have either LMA or Roy on the court virtually all the time. So that’s still a lot of firepower.
I’m smiling to myself as I type this, because this team is just loaded with talent. Miller and Webster for Sergio and Frye. It’s almost too good to be true.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 2, 2009 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
It isn’t really fair. I am weeping tears of compassion for the rest of the league. Really.
…
OK, that’s done. I got it out of my system. I’m ready to hear the lamentations of their women, now.
I remain unconvinced. IMO, when Joel is on the floor, you really want either Andre or Brandon on the floor, too, to really break down the defense. Greg getting the ball within five feet of the basket will create the same kind of imbalances in the defense as Brandon penetrating, so we could function well without one of the main playmakers on the court.
The thing that could change this is if Rudy or Martell or Nic become significant threats taking the ball to the hole and breaking down the defense. Especially Rudy, because if he starts driving the lane, he WILL see and find the open man when the defense collapses on him. If Rudy becomes Roy part B, rather than simply a spot up and alley-oop threat, then all of these calculations change, and we’ll hear a whole lot more lamenting from their women.
Well, unless Rudy blows them kisses, in which case they will swoon instead of lament. Either way, it would all be good.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
I see your point and definitely agree about Rudy driving the lane.
I’m concerned that Steve didn’t get the ball into Oden enough last year. They executed a few P&R’s, but not many. We can blame that on Oden, but I think he is more likely to learn to execute better with Miller. I’d also like to see Oden starting.
Perhaps the best solution is to always keep Miller or Roy on the floor. That way we always have someone to break down the defense. Here’s a typical substitution plan for the guards with Miller starting:
1st/3rd
12:00 – Start Miller. Roy, Oden, LMA, Batum/Webster
6:00 – Blake for Miller
2:00 – Miller for Roy, Rudy for Blake
2nd/4th
8:00 – Roy for Miller (Roy and Rudy play SG/PG for next 2 minutes)
6:00 – Blake for SF (3-guard line up for next 6 minutes *)
3:00 – Miller for Blake
*3-guard line up used 0-6 minutes depending on match ups
Typical Total Minutes (with 12 minutes of 3-guard lineup):
Roy – 36
Miller – 30
Blake – 14
Rudy – 28 (includes 0-12 minutes as SF on offense in 3-guard lineup)
You can juggle Miller vs Blake vs Rudy minutes with what you do in the last 6 minutes of each half depending on match ups.
This maximizes Oden’s time with Miller (starting 1st/3rd, possibly 2nd/4th depending on Oden’s foul troubles, and probably ending half’s together), and either Roy or Miller is always in the game with Joel.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 2, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
When I put on my "Nate" hat
I’m trying to balance a lot of things.
1. We weren’t a great offensive first quarter team last year. What would improve that? Perhaps having Andre start. But if Greg is an offensive threat, wouldn’t having him start instead of Joel help, too? At least he is likely to add a bucket or two off of offensive rebounds, which would help. Perhaps if Martell comes back well, he could help, or perhaps Nic becomes a better offensive threat this year. OK, we have options — maybe Andre, Greg, or Martell start, or maybe Nic provides it and we do nothing.
2. Without Brandon, we might struggle with offensive stagnation on the second unit. Andre would really help with that. So, ideally, we have either Andre or Brandon on the floor at all times. Perhaps Rudy fills that offensive creator gap so it isn’t necessary to have either Andre or Brandon, but we aren’t there right now. Perhaps Jerryd takes a big step up, steals Steve’s minutes, and becomes the guy who breaks down the defense for our second unit. But we want to solve this problem of relying on Travis hitting a fade away jumper as the clock is winding down.
3. We are pretty sure that Andre is going to be effective with our centers, and facilitate Greg’s learning curve. So we want Andre to get significant PT with Greg.
My solution, trying to balance all the different things, is to start Greg and Steve, to bring in Andre at 8 minutes, the rest of the second unit at the end of the quarter, and bring back the starters for the last 4-5 minutes of the half.
Second half you might start Andre, which would give Greg more “Miller time”.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
^^^ You can juggle Miller vs Blake and Rudy vs SF minutes with what you do in the last 6 minutes of each half ...
Playing less 3-guard lineup trades Rudy’s minutes for a SF’s minutes. You can juggle Miller vs Blake minutes based on match ups, hot hands, whatever.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Sep 2, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions
RT: If they aren’t playing with Brandon, I don’t know who will create.
Not every offensive set needs a “creator” to be effective
For example, who was the “creator” on the 1977 team?
(Answer, there were many, but none of them used the dribble drive, much)
If Blake, Rudy and Webster were playing alongside Przy, Nate could have Joel set screens and Rudy/Martell could curl off them and receive the pass from Steve for an open jumper
Ben might call that strategy “passing around the perimeter” but if the shot goes down, the RG crowd will still appreciate the execution and teamwork.
Just like the MC crowd did, back in ’77
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Yes, if we actually have an offense
that is predicated on extensive off-the-ball movement and screens, you don’t need a creator — the movement and the passing do it for you.
I would love to see that, but we sure haven’t seen much of it under Nate.
If we have that offense on our second unit, I wouldn’t even mind seeing Travis play the bulk of our backup PF minutes, because it would be yet another spread-the-court 3 point threat. Set the screens and then drift to the corner when they cheat on it.
We’d get hurt on the other end with that lineup, but Joel would erase enough defensive mistakes that we would far better than most team’s backups.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
Martell's 24 point quarter
sure, it’s a small sample, but it serves as indelible proof that those plays are in Nate’s book
(and if Portland’s bench players were to run a steady diet of pin downs and curls, I’d want a backup PF who can rebound well and set screens, like Jeff Foster)
As your sig line indicates, I’d stil prefer either Roy or Miller to be in the game for all “critical” minutes, but I can also see a movement offense with Martell and Rudy as the cutters and Blake as the ‘trigger man’ being effective, for short spurts each half. It would give the opposing coach something different to game plan for, and if nothing else break up the predictability of ISOs and P&Rs
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Cunningham exhibited a wonderful ability to set picks in summer league. If there’s a skill that would be easily transitioned to the NBA game, it’s setting picks.
"If the Lakers are Hollywood, then we are South Central." - Clipper fan.
yes, but it's a different kind of pick that I'm talking about
in Vegas ’Ham was out in space, screening off a PG then sliding over to an open spot to receive a pass for an open jumper
on a “pin-down” the forward and center set up shop near the lane and pick-off opposing SGs and SFs to free up a curling shooter for a quick shot (think: Reggie Miller) You can do this with one post player, but it’s more effective with 2 and Outlaw isn’t really the right “kind” of PF to set a hard screen and free up a wing shooter
Dante might become that 2nd guy, but I’m not expecting regular minutes for either of the Blazer rookies. Portland’s bench needs a veteran PF to provide depth and experience
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Hope your right
about GO staying in the game for 28 minutes minimum. If we get that night in and out, could be WCF this year. Sorry for getting off the thread:)
WRECK
i always hate to rec u , but there u have it
S
The Princess of Blazersedge
Sports do not build character. They reveal it. - Casey Dillon Stengel
I'll admit that I'm usually more of a "wreck" than worthy of a "rec" here.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
Let’s just put this to bed right away.
Miller is starting. He might not see Chris Paul minutes, but he’ll get more than Blake and play when it matters most.
Regarding Hedo Türkoğlu:
Look at the bright side, Blazers fans -- you dodged a bullet. He peaked statistically two years ago. He's allegedly 30 but could be closer to 32 or 33 for all we know. (Do you trust Turkish birth certificates? And isn't it weird that he played four years of pro ball in Turkey in the 1990s?)
- Bill Simmons of ESPN.com
Link?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
It's strange that Miller is going to have the best post moves on the team by far.
I wish we could stick his brain into Oden’s body.
by Nick Van Excellent on Sep 2, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
if you watch that all the way until the end, you'll see Miller picking Jack's pocket
A couple more observations, from that highlight video
The Blazers got that #24? He’s going to make a huge difference. Miller plays a lot “taller” than 6’3 (just ask Dirk)
Andre favors setting up on the left side of the court, then hesitating or spinning to the baseline with his left-hand, but finishing with his right (similar to Brandon)
If Miller and Roy are in the game together, the opposing coach is going to have a tough decision: Who will his small-quick PG defend? Either way, it should be a post-up (or iso) fest
Why hasn’t Andre been an all-star? There are some pretty good PGs in the NBA, and he’s played for some rebuilding ballclubs. Was Rod Strickland ever an all-star? How about Greg Anthony?
The one thing that clip didn’t show…all of the hours that Miller spent in the video room, so he was prepared to take advantage of the other team’s weaknesses, while out on the court
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Sick hesitation moves.
How embarrassing to be caught like that for the defender.
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Let's just put this to bed right away
Nate will decide who starts, and the fact that Andre obviously wants to start is a good thing, but will not drive Nate’s decision.
Nor, necessarily, will the fact that Andre is a better player. That is a fact, and will determine who is playing at the end of games, but not necessarily at the start.
It’s called thinking outside the box. Your best players do not necessarily have to start the game. Your best players should play the most minutes, but there is nothing magical about the first six minutes of the game that requires the best players to be in the game. You set your best rotations for 48 mpg.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
wwwwiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I love Andre already. How perfect
Im so done w/ all you steve blake fan.boys
it’s embarrasing.
Andre Miller FTW
The Princess
The Princess of Blazersedge
Sports do not build character. They reveal it. - Casey Dillon Stengel
BF1 is fatty!!!!?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
As a "Blake fan boy" I am done with you too...
I read your blog and it’s hard for me to believe anything would embarrass you… Take care and stay cool…
I just scrolled up, seems to b that all the blake.fan.boys
are taking their indignation out on Ben the blogger. Not fair.
Miller>>> Blake
The. End.
S
The Princess of Blazersedge
Sports do not build character. They reveal it. - Casey Dillon Stengel
Yes it is...
…and yes I am. The last thing we need, in my opinion, is to pick sides on which PG is THE one. They have complimentary skills and will both contribute. No matter who starts or who gets what minutes we have a far superior PG rotation than we had last year.
They're both Blazers
and they’re both really good at what they do
I don’t understand what all the fuss is about, and I said this from the first time Nate made his initial “Blake will still be the starter” comment. To reach the next level, KP needed to add a better PG to the roster than Steve. He’s done that. Sure, how Nate arranges his lineups is worthy of debate, but at the end of the day talent and BBIQ are what win NBA championships, and Miller adds both
now, let’s get past the first round of the playoffs and everyone will be a fan of Andre and Steve
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Sep 2, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I like both Andre Miller and Steve Blake, even though I want to upgrade from Blake to Kirk Hinrich.
The one guy who I’ve got 100% no love loss for is Jerryd Bayless, but he’s not even a real point guard.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
I'd like to pair Kirk Hinrich with Brandon Roy and Joel Przybilla, while Andre Miller teams ...
with Rudy Fernandez and Greg Oden. So, all things considered, Hinrich would start and Miller would finish. The starting lineup would consist of Przybilla, LaMarcus Aldridge, Nicolas Batum, Roy, and Hinrich, while Oden, Aldridge, Fernandez, Roy, and Miller would finish games.
FIRST QUARTER & THIRD QUARTER
Six Minutes
C: Joel Przybilla
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge
SF: Nicolas Batum
SG: Brandon Roy
PG: Kirk Hinrich
Two Minutes
C: Greg Oden
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge
SF: Rudy Fernandez
SG: Brandon Roy
PG: Andre Miller
Four Minutes
C: Greg Oden
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge
SF: Martell Webster
SG: Rudy Fernandez
PG: Andre Miller
SECOND QUARTER & FOURTH QUARTER
Four Minutes
C: Joel Przybilla
PF: Dante Cunningham
SF: Nicolas Batum
SG: Brandon Roy
PG: Kirk Hinrich
Eight Minutes
C: Greg Oden
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge
SF: Rudy Fernandez
SG: Brandon Roy
PG: Andre Miller
40 MPG
Brandon Roy & LaMarcus Aldridge
28 MPG
Greg Oden, Rudy Fernandez, & Andre Miller
20 MPG
Joel Przybilla, Nicolas Batum, & Kirk Hinrich
8 MPG
Dante Cunningham & Martell Webster
Man, I wish Martell Webster was never given that costly contract extension. As it is, the Portland Trail Blazers would’ve been in better shape if Webster walked this off-season and the ballclub signed veteran Ime Udoka to a one-year, minimum-level contract to be a role player who’s fine with sparse playing time.
Stupid people have stupid ideas.
Not sure how you can say that
until we actually see Martell play.
Clearly, they were seeing something in training camp (which we never had the chance to see) that convinced them to extend Martell despite the injury. That makes me think a healthy Martell was tearing it up.
So while I’m cautious about what we’ll get from Martell, at least at the start of the year, I suspect the Blazer braintrust is convinced he’s going to be a real player for us.
"if Nate has Roy or Miller in the game at all times, that stagnation will turn into conflagration" -- two4larue
and I think Martell is going to surprise you
just a hunch. That “costly contract extension” will look like a steal for the Blazer’s front office before it’s completed
When reached 39 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Funniest thing I'd read all week!
Steve Blake couldn’t be reached for comment. He was too busy swinging the ball around the perimeter.
That’s not a cheap shot…..
2-4 the who
I like Andre.
No disrespect to Blake.
PG is a position that carries an certain role and responsibility. Blake can run an offense, keep his turnovers low with respect to his usage, and hit the open shot. That is probably the baseline of skills you would want from a starting PG.
Miller just brings more to the table and has more experience. I think the Blazers offense will open up when Miller is the PG. I do think Blake’s skillset has played a part to hold the offense back from being more creative and less predictable. Of course McMillan may be the culprit, we’ll find out this season.
"I'm at the thingamajig talking the yakety-yak" - Kenny Smith
It's ridiculous to argue really
Other than those with the super star PGs, we have one of the strongest PG rotations in the league now. It’s finally going to be a strength for us rather than a weakness regardless of who starts. Those of you mad at Miller over what he said or those going after blake and his “fan boys” are missing the big picture…we have both.
by Bskey on Sep 2, 2009 3:55 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
there are people here that think blake will actually start?
not saying that he doesn’t deserve it… im saying some people think it will actually happen like in real life?
True Lies
Listen first of all, I have no problem at all with what Andre Miller said, I’d expect that both Blake and Miller since both have a history of starting, would expect to be starters and battle for that title.
However, I’d hope both understand this, that on The Blazers, with the roster we have, it’s a little unique. Lip service is paid often to White Unit, Black Unit, it doesn’t matter who starts it’s who finishes…but our starting unit and reserves are unique. I don’t think it’s a matter of the best PG starts as much as that would normally be the case. I think it’s going to be the best PG with the starting unit starts, the best PG for the second unit, is with the second unit….with occasional overlaps…it won’t be cut and dry. The decision as to who starts, might hinge on who plays best with Brandon and LMA as opposed to who really is the “best” PG. That gives Blake a real chance. I think Andre is the more talented, more experienced PG but he has yet to prove or show how he plays with Brandon and LMA. This summer, the great player we signed to a long term contract was Brandon Roy, not Andre Miller. The reality will be who plays best with Brandon. That has yet to be deteremined.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
by Krang on Sep 3, 2009 7:56 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Who are the five best players?
The typical way a coach organizes his starting unit is to put his five best players on it unless two of them play the same position. That’s tough to do with this team because:
- We have ten players who are good enough to start.
- It isn’t clear right now who the five best players on this team are (aside from Brandon and LaMarcus).
- Of the way the strengths and weaknesses of the different players fit together.
If we put Steve, Brandon, Nic, LaMarcus, and Joel on the starting unit, and Andre, Rudy, Martell, Travis, and Greg on the second unit, we have two teams that are close in overall offensive and defensive ability. Do we get more bang for our buck by going with a two-strong-teams lineup like that, or should Nate identify and start the five best players?
It’s hard to say at this point in their careers whether Greg vs Joel, Nic vs Martell, and Steve vs. Andre should be starters or reserves. I can’t wait to see how it all sorts out.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Blazer's Edge
Related FanShots on Blazer's Edge
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
