making other players better - miller

sweetlou23 · Post #1 » by **sweetlou23** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:14 pm

Who does andre miller make better and how? I do not think that iggy's game is raised to higher level by playing with Miller. If it is he must he has a lot less game than i thought. Reggie evans is reggie evans. nobody can make him better. sammy's game does not seem to benefit from millers presence. however, it can be argued that Miller does seem to raise the level of willie greens game. thad does what he does on his own.

so other than willie, i really don't see how he makes other players better.

Johnny Broad-Street · Post #2 » by **Johnny Broad-Street** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:17 pm

Sammy's having his best year to date. If you watch, Miller is in his ear all the time directing him and keeping him focused.

And you couldn't play Thad the kind of minutes he's playing without Miller on the team. He puts him in the right spots to succeed without demanding he do things he isn't ready to do.

THFM · Post #3 » by **THFM** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:20 pm

Dont' you notice how Miller does this bullet passes to under the rim and practically spoon feeds willie green two points everytime he does it?

Johnny Broad-Street · Post #4 » by **Johnny Broad-Street** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:24 pm

I throw up in my mouth a bit as I say this....But Willie takes less ill-advised shots with Miller on the floor.

Oh god...I feel so dirty now...

Sixers24 · Post #5 » by **Sixers24** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:58 pm

How isn't Iggy's game raised? He gets easier shots, baskets in transition, and doesn't have to facilitate the offense.

Johnny Broad-Street · Post #6 » by **Johnny Broad-Street** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:00 pm

Again with guys disappearing when their opinion is challenged. Maybe he's busy or working or something, but where's the chatter?

sweetlou23 · Post #7 » by **sweetlou23** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:45 pm

I cant check this every minute. I think miller gets way too much credit. Miller has been very good at keeping us in games with his high percentage shooting at opportune moments. but in terms of elevating the games of people around him. i'm sorry, I just don't see it. Iggy is supposed to be a borderline franchise player. Igs has solid numbers, but they are not where they need to be and I do not see how miller has helped him elevate his offensive game. i do not see iggy having the year i expected him to have. Also Don't give miller credit for youngs court awareness. that's thad being thad. Moreover, a couple of lobs here, some backdoor plays there does not make miller the be all end all of point guards as Salmi would have you believe. Miller is solid, hes a slightly better than average point guard. Hes just not "magic lite" like you guys make him out to be.

bebopdeluxe · Post #8 » by **bebopdeluxe** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:37 pm

sweetlou:

Who is making Miller out to be "Magic-lite"?

He is a VERY solid NBA PG...having a very solid season.

I believe that he is the reason why we overachieved after the trade last season, and why we may very well make the playoffs (with one of the youngest rotations in the NBA) this season. He never gets hurt. He knows when to get "his". The coaches love him. The players respect him. And - unless someone can point out aspects of decline in his game - there is no reason why he cannot continue to be a solid NBA PG for another 3-4 years.

That is why many of us around here like him...and why some of us are in no rush to give him away for less-than-reasonable value.

Does that make sense?

Post #9 » by **tk76** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:42 pm

Miller may not directly make players better, but he is a huge asset to this team.

Miller has been great at stepping up and getting key points and boards when the rest of the team comes out flat. This keeps us in games where otherwise the young players typically lulls would lead to us being blown out.

What makes this key is that unlike a big name scorer, Miller is able to step back and let the younger guys get back involved after Miller has given us a 3 minute spurt to keep us in the game.

Also, people dismiss having character vets, but it does have a big impact when a vet can lead younger guys both on and off the court. Look at dysfunctional teams like the knicks. They have vets like Marbury that are self centered and cannot tolerate rookie type mistakes. They also see young rising players as threats to their touches.

You can argue that Miller does not directly help the young guys, but he is clearly a steadying influence on the team on and off the court- which helps create the type of team where young players can get heavy PT in competitive games and speed along their learning curve.

sweetlou23 · Post #10 » by **sweetlou23** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:45 pm

hes a good player and you guys got your wish. pyrite is still here. but is he a part of the sixers long term plans? i think keeping him is going to help us in the short term (wins) but hurt us in the long term (player development). we now have the rest of the year to make our playoff run, and evaluate our young players. are you guys really expecting any new revelations? we are not going to luck up and find ourselves as contenders. we'll lose in the first round, miss out on a high draft pick and be left to speculate about who we will draft, who we can pick up through free agency and trades over the summer. deja vu.

to me, andre miller is like that job that you get that pays just enough to keep you there, and doesn't stress you out too much. its just good enough to keep you comfortable and provide you with the illusion of progress while your actually treading water. three years down the line you look back at all of the missed opportunities and you realize that you should have quit a long time ago. but its too late.

noone · Post #11 » by **noone** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:21 am

No doubt Miller has made the young players on this team play better. But nobody can convince me that the young players wouldn't have eventually reached the same potential without Miller. Miller only sped up the process a bit. And for the fact that they still reach that same potential, Miller should have been traded a long time ago. At the very latest should have been gone today. Better late than never. As it stands we don't have the money to pick up a big time FA, and as far as I understand the money we have now is the money we will have in the offseason, no chance to have more. This blows.

noone · Post #12 » by **noone** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:22 am

to me, andre miller is like that job that you get that pays just enough to keep you there, and doesn't stress you out too much. its just good enough to keep you comfortable and provide you with the illusion of progress while your actually treading water. three years down the line you look back at all of the missed opportunities and you realize that you should have quit a long time ago. but its too late.

Agree 100%.

dond · Post #13 » by **dond** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 1:26 am

Don't it always seem to be .... ???

That you don't know what you got 'til it's gone ... !!!

Pave Paradise ... Put up a parking lot ....

Pave paradise ... Put up a parking lot ...

Sandalf42 · Post #14 » by **Sandalf42** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 1:40 am

Andre Miller is the constant that a young team like this needs.

He's always calm, under control, and getting the ball where it needs to be, effiecently and on time. Not to mention he puts all the players in a poistion to score.

The reason everyone on this board likes him is because there are very few of these natural PGs in the league these days. We are incredibly lucky to have him here.

Having played basketball myself, I can tell you, it's much much easier to play when you know your PG will always find you when your open.

dond · Post #15 » by **dond** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:20 am

Sandalf42 wrote:Andre Miller is the constant that a young team like this needs.

He's always calm, under control, and getting the ball where it needs to be, effiecently and on time. Not to mention he puts all the players in a poistion to score.

The reason everyone on this board likes him is because there are very few of these natural PGs in the league these days. We are incredibly lucky to have him here.

Having played basketball myself, I can tell you, it's much much easier to play when you know your PG will always find you when your open.

Exactly !!!!!

There is nothing worse for team effort level and moral than to have a PG who fails to get you the ball at just the right moment when you are poised to score. When you know you will get the ball if you break open, you will work your tail off to get open. Otherwise, you may just be going through the motions after awhile because you don't have confidence that you will get the ball anyway. George Karl said it when they traded Miller away for Iverson ... he said, he was very reluctant to give up Miller. He is still trying to find a PG to run the team ... unsuccessfully I might add.

freshie2 · Post #16 » by **freshie2** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 3:20 am

Agreed...the value of someone who sees everything, anticipates every move, and gets you the ball in scoring situations that are not expected is something that is crucial to team success.

bebopdeluxe · Post #17 » by **bebopdeluxe** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:05 am

sweetlou:

What are you talking about? Miller is "just good enough" to keep us "comfortable"?

Are we watching the same games?

Miller has played PG at a very high level this season...are you trying to say that his PG play has been "just good enough"?

:nonono:

He's averaging 16.5 ppg (highest in his career), shooting 49.7% from the floor (by far the highest in his career), he has a 2.6-to-1 ast/TO ratio, averages 4+ boards a game...

With this team?

What do you think his numbers would be like if he played for the Spurs or Mavs or Pistons?

Man...if that is your definition of "just good enough"...

Hoo-boy.

He's missed three games in a nine year career. Three. What makes you think that - based on the season he is having this season (arguably the best of his career, given the players he has to work with) and his proven history of durability - that he cannt perform at this leave for another 3-4 seasons? Speed is not the most critical part of his game - losing a half-step ain't gonna kill the man.

This isn't like the Suns - where they traded for Shaq because guys like Nash and Hill only have so much left in the tank. If you believe that Iggy, Thad, Sammy, Lou and the other pieces that Eddie brings in this summer are going to continue to develop over the next couple of years, why would we just want to dump Miller for a bunch of expirings and some contenders crappy #1 pick? Even if we have $20 million this summer there is ZERO guarantee that Brand, Okafor, Josh Smith or anybody else that people on this board have a chubby for are even going to be available...

And then what do we do?

Nash? 34 years old...still playing at a high level.

Kidd? 35? Microfracture survivor...and the Mavs are betting the ranch.

Miller? Not yet 32...but let's dump him (despite the fact that he's never been hurt and is having the best season of his career).

I respect your opinion....I just don't agree with it.

sweetlou23 · Post #18 » by **sweetlou23** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:07 am

i think alot of people like andre miller because he is the anti-AI. cool. ai is ai and rather than digress into an ai pro or con discussion, i'd rather speak about miller. in the last umpteen years, other than detroit, the only folks who have won the prize have had shaq, duncan or jordan (houston had akeem when jordan was on haitus). on those teams the point guard position has really been a complementary one at best. parker is an excellent point. billups is better than parker. but the reality is that in todays game you need a dominant big to win it all. detroit is an anomaly because when their starting five won the championship they were the most versatile starting five around. on both sides of the ball, they had few if any holes.

Miller is providing sixers fans with false hope. he is simply a good point guard. he is not going to take us anywhere. he is a complementary piece. Not a piece you build around. package him up with somebody and get a big that can do some damage. he has helped our youngsters develop but his stay here is rapidly approaching the point of diminishing returns.
Moreover, it has been the young guys that have kept us in a lot of games. their energy level and style of play has enabled us to be competitive in games where we would otherwise have been blown out. only recently (since thad has started) has our first unit been getting the job done. while i appreciate what miller has done for us, i feel that it is time to move on.

Post #19 » by **Sixerscan** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 4:12 am

bebopdeluxe wrote:sweetlou:

What are you talking about? Miller is "just good enough" to keep us "comfortable"?

Are we watching the same games?

Miller has played PG at a very high level this season...are you trying to say that his PG play has been "just good enough"?

I don't see anything wrong with that. He's playing really well, much better than I expected him to. But it's not like he's bringing us a title. We're 7 games under .500 in a terrible conference. If he wasn't here we'd probably be one of the worst teams in the league. So yeah, he's keeping us "comfortable."

Fire BK · Post #20 » by **Fire BK** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 5:14 am

dond wrote:
There is nothing worse for team effort level and moral than to have a PG who fails to get you the ball at just the right moment when you are poised to score. When you know you will get the ball if you break open, you will work your tail off to get open. Otherwise, you may just be going through the motions after awhile because you don't have confidence that you will get the ball anyway. George Karl said it when they traded Miller away for Iverson ... he said, he was very reluctant to give up Miller. He is still trying to find a PG to run the team ... unsuccessfully I might add.

great post.